• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** West Indies in New Zealand 2013/14

Beamer

International Vice-Captain
Disgraceful umpiring. Chalk yet another one up to the 'decision upheld but clearly an error' list. We've had quite a few recently.
 

Neil Pickup

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Obviously not seen any of this as the TV is showing England disintegrating again, but I'm finding myself wondering how you can argue against a batsman being given out LBW purely on the grounds that he's a long way down the wicket, especially when HawkEye goes on to show the ball hitting the stumps.
 

Bahnz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The expression on Mills's face as the bowler is running in makes it look like his first born son has just been struck down by the light of god.
 

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
Nah, it's not incorrect.

It's just ridiculous that an umpire would give that out.
yup basically.

I don't have any problem with the system or even the fact that it was given out. It' just an example of an umpire not doing his initial job properly.
 

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
Obviously not seen any of this as the TV is showing England disintegrating again, but I'm finding myself wondering how you can argue against a batsman being given out LBW purely on the grounds that he's a long way down the wicket, especially when HawkEye goes on to show the ball hitting the stumps.
Nah, it's absolutely out.
It's just weird for an umpire to be giving it out initially.
An umpire will usually give benefit of the doubt to the batsman and there were 4 points of doubt a) halfway down the pitch b) hitting him in line c) height d) missing leg.
As it stands it was out. It's just hard to see how an umpire could give it out initially.

Don't have a problem with the outcome at all. it's out.
 

wellAlbidarned

International Coach
If mccullum was a tailender padding up to that trying to squeeze a cheeky leg bye I'd support that being given because it's negative cricket
 

wellAlbidarned

International Coach
Nah, it's absolutely out.
It's just weird for an umpire to be giving it out initially.
An umpire will usually give benefit of the doubt to the batsman and there were 4 points of doubt a) halfway down the pitch b) hitting him in line c) height d) missing leg.
As it stands it was out. It's just hard to see how an umpire could give it out initially.

Don't have a problem with the outcome at all. it's out.
Yeah agree. It was out fair and square but I reckon it was a fluke decision and he'd get it wrong 9 times out of 10
 

KiWiNiNjA

International Coach
He needed runner-runner to win the hand, he did all the calculations and came up with odds of 1/25, yet he still pushed all his chips into the middle.
 

Bahnz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Hmmm:

Gayle, Edwards, Bravo, Samuels, Chanders, Bravo, Ramdin, Narine, Rampaul, Roach, Holder

Should provide a huge challenge in the Caribbean.
 

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
ironically, Holder and Rampaul might not be quite as tough propositions in the Caribbean as they would've been in NZ.
 

Bahnz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Heh, yeah true, though still a bigger challenge than any of the rabble WI sent down for this series.
 

Top